Velocity Reviews

Velocity Reviews (http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/index.php)
-   Digital Photography (http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/f37-digital-photography.html)
-   -   Re: Larry Thong's Video Adventures!! (http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/t647523-re-larry-thongs-video-adventures.html)

Eric Stevens 12-07-2008 01:56 AM

Re: Larry Thong's Video Adventures!!
 
On Sat, 6 Dec 2008 20:04:02 -0500, "Larry Thong"
<larry_thong@shitstring.com> wrote:

>It seems inevitable, having to upgrade the old dual Xeon system to something
>with a little more horsepower under the hood. Though only a single proc
>machine ...


"Only a single proc machine"?

Come on now!

Its a quad-core (i.e. four processor machine)!


> .... it should do some serious ass kicking!


You betcha.

>
><http://www.supermicro.com/products/nfo/ci7.cfm>
>
>




Eric Stevens

Eric Stevens 12-07-2008 10:10 PM

Re: Larry Thong's Video Adventures!!
 
On Sun, 07 Dec 2008 14:56:11 +1300, Eric Stevens
<eric.stevens@sum.co.nz> wrote:

>On Sat, 6 Dec 2008 20:04:02 -0500, "Larry Thong"
><larry_thong@shitstring.com> wrote:
>
>>It seems inevitable, having to upgrade the old dual Xeon system to something
>>with a little more horsepower under the hood. Though only a single proc
>>machine ...

>
>"Only a single proc machine"?
>
>Come on now!
>
>Its a quad-core (i.e. four processor machine)!
>
>
>> .... it should do some serious ass kicking!

>
>You betcha.
>
>>
>><http://www.supermicro.com/products/nfo/ci7.cfm>
>>
>>


Look at the top of the page to which your URL links. In the third line
it says 'Intel(R) quad-core processors'.

Then look at the specifications for the individual mother boards. On
the top line it says 'Intel(R) CoreTM i7 Processors'. Now look at
Wikipedia to find out exactly what is a Intel(R) CoreTM i7 Processor.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Core_3

"Intel Core i7 is a family of three Intel desktop x86-64 processors,
the first processors released using the Intel Nehalem
microarchitecture and the successor to the Intel Core 2 family. All
three models are quad-core processors."

The fact that they are all on a single chip in a single hole in the
motherboard does not mean that your four processors are in any way
diminished. Quite the reverse in fact as on-chip communications are
always faster than data which has to wander around the labyrinth of
motherboard conductors.

You have a power house there.



Eric Stevens

Ray Fischer 12-07-2008 11:37 PM

Re: Larry Thong's Video Adventures!!
 
Larry Thong <larry_thong@shitstring.com> wrote:
>Eric Stevens wrote:
>
>>> It seems inevitable, having to upgrade the old dual Xeon system to
>>> something with a little more horsepower under the hood. Though only
>>> a single proc machine ...

>>
>> "Only a single proc machine"?
>>
>> Come on now!
>>
>> Its a quad-core (i.e. four processor machine)!

>
>Nope, there's only one hole on the MB. Had there been two holes I'd fill
>both of them. My dual Xeon box has two physical sockets filled and shows
>four procs, but it is still considered a dual proc box.


You're a classic example of somebody who knows a little but believes
that he knows a lot.

--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net


J. Clarke 12-08-2008 12:30 AM

Re: Larry Thong's Video Adventures!!
 
Ray Fischer wrote:
> Larry Thong <larry_thong@shitstring.com> wrote:
>> Eric Stevens wrote:
>>
>>>> It seems inevitable, having to upgrade the old dual Xeon system
>>>> to
>>>> something with a little more horsepower under the hood. Though
>>>> only a single proc machine ...
>>>
>>> "Only a single proc machine"?
>>>
>>> Come on now!
>>>
>>> Its a quad-core (i.e. four processor machine)!

>>
>> Nope, there's only one hole on the MB. Had there been two holes
>> I'd
>> fill both of them. My dual Xeon box has two physical sockets
>> filled
>> and shows four procs, but it is still considered a dual proc box.

>
> You're a classic example of somebody who knows a little but believes
> that he knows a lot.


Software that is licensed per processor often doesn't incur additonal
fees for additional cores as long as they are on the same chip. Thus
it's not the meaningless distinction that you seem to believe it to
be.


--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)



Eric Stevens 12-08-2008 02:06 AM

Re: Larry Thong's Video Adventures!!
 
On Sun, 7 Dec 2008 19:30:12 -0500, "J. Clarke"
<jclarke.usenet@cox.net> wrote:

>Ray Fischer wrote:
>> Larry Thong <larry_thong@shitstring.com> wrote:
>>> Eric Stevens wrote:
>>>
>>>>> It seems inevitable, having to upgrade the old dual Xeon system
>>>>> to
>>>>> something with a little more horsepower under the hood. Though
>>>>> only a single proc machine ...
>>>>
>>>> "Only a single proc machine"?
>>>>
>>>> Come on now!
>>>>
>>>> Its a quad-core (i.e. four processor machine)!
>>>
>>> Nope, there's only one hole on the MB. Had there been two holes
>>> I'd
>>> fill both of them. My dual Xeon box has two physical sockets
>>> filled
>>> and shows four procs, but it is still considered a dual proc box.

>>
>> You're a classic example of somebody who knows a little but believes
>> that he knows a lot.

>
>Software that is licensed per processor often doesn't incur additonal
>fees for additional cores as long as they are on the same chip. Thus
>it's not the meaningless distinction that you seem to believe it to
>be.
>


I've never heard of software licensed by the processor. Can you give
me an example?



Eric Stevens

ASAAR 12-08-2008 03:33 AM

Re: Larry Thong's Video Adventures!!
 
On Sun, 7 Dec 2008 21:43:45 -0500, Larry the dipThong wrote:

> The case is nice. I use the same one except for it being packed with U320
> SCSI drives. I'm finally going to be rubbing elbows with mere mortals as
> this will be my first SATA system. I thought I'd never do it. Thank god I
> still can do SAS. SATA, I must be getting old and senile?


And feeble. Before you know it you'll be back to eBay looking for
a clean D70 to mount an 18-200mm VR again. The bad news is it'll
lower your Bragging Index. The good news is you'll be able to lift
it, and the snapshots you take with it will be just as good as
anything you've ever shot using your fabulously expensive and heavy
Nikon and Canon gear, and you can sell your pack mule on eBay.


Annika1980 12-08-2008 03:47 AM

Re: Larry Thong's Video Adventures!!
 
On Dec 7, 9:43*pm, "Larry Thong" <larry_th...@shitstring.com> wrote:
>
> The case is nice. *I use the same one except for it being packed with U320
> SCSI drives. *I'm finally going to be rubbing elbows with mere mortals as
> this will be my first SATA system. *I thought I'd never do it. *Thank god I
> still can do SAS. *SATA, I must be getting old and senile?


Don't keep us in suspense any longer!
Which operating system will you be using?
Gotta be 64-bit, I'm thinking.




Ray Fischer 12-08-2008 04:51 AM

Re: Larry Thong's Video Adventures!!
 
Eric Stevens <eric.stevens@sum.co.nz> wrote:
>On Sun, 7 Dec 2008 19:30:12 -0500, "J. Clarke"
><jclarke.usenet@cox.net> wrote:
>
>>Ray Fischer wrote:
>>> Larry Thong <larry_thong@shitstring.com> wrote:
>>>> Eric Stevens wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> It seems inevitable, having to upgrade the old dual Xeon system
>>>>>> to
>>>>>> something with a little more horsepower under the hood. Though
>>>>>> only a single proc machine ...
>>>>>
>>>>> "Only a single proc machine"?
>>>>>
>>>>> Come on now!
>>>>>
>>>>> Its a quad-core (i.e. four processor machine)!
>>>>
>>>> Nope, there's only one hole on the MB. Had there been two holes
>>>> I'd
>>>> fill both of them. My dual Xeon box has two physical sockets
>>>> filled
>>>> and shows four procs, but it is still considered a dual proc box.
>>>
>>> You're a classic example of somebody who knows a little but believes
>>> that he knows a lot.

>>
>>Software that is licensed per processor often doesn't incur additonal
>>fees for additional cores as long as they are on the same chip. Thus
>>it's not the meaningless distinction that you seem to believe it to
>>be.

>
>I've never heard of software licensed by the processor. Can you give
>me an example?


http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/07..._core_pricing/

Get your calculators out. Oracle has responded to the arrival of high
volume multicore chips by introducing a new pricing model, and it's a
comedy of fractions.

Oracle's lucrative franchise has been based on per-CPU pricing, and
the company has so far pretended to ignore the massive changes taking
place in the processor industry. Unix vendors have sold dual-core
processors for some time, and now AMD has joined the party, with Intel
to follow. Two cores don't spell twice the performance, but they do
deliver enough of a performance boost to muck up per processor
licensing models.

Now Oracle has acknowledged that multicore processors do exist.

"For the purposes of counting the number of processors that require
licensing, the number of cores in a multi-core chip now shall be
multiplied by a factor of .75," Oracle said. "Previously, each core
was counted as a full processor."

--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net


Ray Fischer 12-08-2008 04:52 AM

Re: Larry Thong's Video Adventures!!
 
J. Clarke <jclarke.usenet@cox.net> wrote:
>Ray Fischer wrote:
>> Larry Thong <larry_thong@shitstring.com> wrote:
>>> Eric Stevens wrote:
>>>
>>>>> It seems inevitable, having to upgrade the old dual Xeon system
>>>>> to
>>>>> something with a little more horsepower under the hood. Though
>>>>> only a single proc machine ...
>>>>
>>>> "Only a single proc machine"?
>>>>
>>>> Come on now!
>>>>
>>>> Its a quad-core (i.e. four processor machine)!
>>>
>>> Nope, there's only one hole on the MB. Had there been two holes
>>> I'd
>>> fill both of them. My dual Xeon box has two physical sockets
>>> filled
>>> and shows four procs, but it is still considered a dual proc box.

>>
>> You're a classic example of somebody who knows a little but believes
>> that he knows a lot.

>
>Software that is licensed per processor often doesn't incur additonal
>fees for additional cores as long as they are on the same chip.


It often does incur additional fees.

> Thus
>it's not the meaningless distinction that you seem to believe it to
>be.


Did you read something that I didn't write?

--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net


Ray Fischer 12-08-2008 04:54 AM

Re: Larry Thong's Video Adventures!!
 
Larry Thong <larry_thong@shitstring.com> wrote:
>Eric Stevens wrote:
>
>>>> It seems inevitable, having to upgrade the old dual Xeon system to
>>>> something with a little more horsepower under the hood. Though
>>>> only a single proc machine ...
>>>
>>> "Only a single proc machine"?
>>>
>>> Come on now!
>>>
>>> Its a quad-core (i.e. four processor machine)!
>>>
>>>
>>>> .... it should do some serious ass kicking!
>>>
>>> You betcha.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> <http://www.supermicro.com/products/nfo/ci7.cfm>
>>>>
>>>>

>>
>> Look at the top of the page to which your URL links. In the third line
>> it says 'Intel(R) quad-core processors'.

>
>Yep.
>
>> Then look at the specifications for the individual mother boards. On
>> the top line it says 'Intel(R) CoreTM i7 Processors'. Now look at
>> Wikipedia to find out exactly what is a Intel(R) CoreTM i7 Processor.
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Core_3
>>
>> "Intel Core i7 is a family of three Intel desktop x86-64 processors,
>> the first processors released using the Intel Nehalem
>> microarchitecture and the successor to the Intel Core 2 family. All
>> three models are quad-core processors."
>>
>> The fact that they are all on a single chip in a single hole in the
>> motherboard does not mean that your four processors are in any way
>> diminished. Quite the reverse in fact as on-chip communications are
>> always faster than data which has to wander around the labyrinth of
>> motherboard conductors.

>
>Electrically you are right, but again, I'm talking about two physical
>sockets as I now have on my dual Xeon MB. It doesn't matter how many core I
>have since I still have two physical procs. When I boot up it doesn't
>matter if I see four or eight penguins since there's only two procs.


But you're wrong. The number of sockets does not determine the number
of processors. It determines the number of, well, not much of anything.
It is common to put multiple CPUs on the same chip.

--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net



All times are GMT. The time now is 10:37 PM.

Powered by vBulletin®. Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
SEO by vBSEO ©2010, Crawlability, Inc.